Bill Overview
Title: Taxpayers DIME Act of 2022
Description: 2022 This bill prohibits the use of federal funds for travel expenses of senior federal officials in violation of specified federal travel regulations.
Sponsors: Rep. O'Halleran, Tom [D-AZ-1]
Target Audience
Population: Federal taxpayers
Estimated Size: 150000000
- The bill focuses on travel expenses related to senior federal officials, which implies it directly affects those officials.
- The bill aims to prevent the misuse of federal funds, which are taxpayer contributions.
- Indirectly, taxpayers are impacted as the bill seeks to protect their money from wasteful use.
- There is an impact on the overall federal budget and fiscal responsibility.
Reasoning
- The policy primarily impacts federal officials by restricting unnecessary travel expenses.
- As taxpayers fund federal operations, there is an indirect impact since the policy aims to reduce wasteful spending.
- The policy's cost reduction might not be immediately noticeable to individual taxpayers, thus having a low to negligible impact on their daily lives.
- Most people will not experience direct effects, and the impact on wellbeing is largely perceptual.
- Target population is very large while the direct impact is narrow, leading to a low average effect size.
Simulated Interviews
Federal Government Official (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 43 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I understand the need for fiscal responsibility, but sometimes travel is essential for my job.
- There needs to be a balance between oversight and functionality.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Accountant (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's reassuring to know funds are not being wasted on unnecessary travel.
- This is a step in the right direction for government accountability.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Software Developer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I haven't given it much thought, but it's good that my tax money isn't wasted.
- I hope these kinds of policies become a norm.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Graduate Student (Boston, MA)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policies like this affirm my belief that government can be efficient.
- I'm slightly more optimistic about how my taxes are used.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Small Business Owner (Houston, TX)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I feel these actions are a necessary part of keeping bureaucracies lean.
- It may set a precedent for more efficient spending policies across sectors.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Retired Teacher (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 76 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's about time they put an end to such expenses.
- While it sounds small, policies like these add up in savings.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Environmental Scientist (Seattle, WA)
Age: 24 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's a minor policy, but symbolic of what could be reshaped in federal spending.
- While it doesn't affect me directly, responsible government spending could lead to better environmental policies too.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Public School Principal (Chicago, IL)
Age: 48 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If more such policies come into play, maybe some of these savings could benefit education.
- I have my doubts about the actual impact, but it's a good start.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Corporate Lawyer (Miami, FL)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Government accountability is crucial. Policies like this are just common sense.
- I hope it leads to more comprehensive budget oversight.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Tech Entrepreneur (Denver, CO)
Age: 36 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I appreciate fiscal responsibility in government, it sets an example for all sectors.
- I sincerely hope it translates into broader policy shifts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $2500000 (Low: $1500000, High: $5000000)
Year 2: $2500000 (Low: $1500000, High: $5000000)
Year 3: $2500000 (Low: $1500000, High: $5000000)
Year 5: $2500000 (Low: $1500000, High: $5000000)
Year 10: $2500000 (Low: $1500000, High: $5000000)
Year 100: $2500000 (Low: $1500000, High: $5000000)
Key Considerations
- Enforcement and monitoring of travel regulations to ensure compliance will be critical.
- The actual cost savings realized would depend on the existing rate of unauthorized travel expenses being claimed.
- Implementation of the bill might require initial administrative costs for setting up compliance frameworks.